Why are presidents expected to work while campaigning when senators aren't?

I was watching CNN this morning when a major bombshell was slipped in. The Anchor when discussing the candidates twisting of facts during the debate mentioned that while Kerry had been rated the "most liberal senator" it was only because while campaiging in 2003, he had missed so many votes as to skew the results and that on a lifetime record he was only the 11th most liberal senator. Now to my mind whether he was 1 or 11 is irrelevant what shocked me was that he had missed more than 75% of all senate votes in 2003. Now before any Kerry supporters jump in this is not a Kerry bashing thread but a simple question, why is the president while campaiging still expected to do his job but when a senator, misses the vast majrity of his votes (which as a senator is hs job) no one raises an eyebrow? Is the fact that he was campaigning a legitimate excuse for not doing the job he still has?

Heck, Kerry/Edwards missed plenty of time even before campaigning, If I lived in Mass. or NC, I'd be pretty ticked that my senators had something better to do than represent me...

Maybe this would be a good time to remember Bob Dole, who resigned from the Senate when he undertook his bid for the white house (www.bobdole.org....

Maybe they want to make sure they're not among the unemployed, come November 3rd...

I have been asking this question for the last two months and even started a thread about it. I have not gotten a satisfactory answer.

Hopefully someone will be able to explain this because it really does anger me.

Here is a partial paste of an article with a link for the full story, about a lawsuit regarding Kerry's missed work:

www.talonnews.com...

Kerry earns $158,000 annually for his work in the U.S. Senate. But the secretary of the Senate is supposed to deduct a portion of his salary each time he fails to show up while the Senate is in session.

"Kerry has been a virtual no-show in the U.S. Senate over the past 14 months, but he hasn't missed a paycheck," the Boston Herald reported earlier this month. "[F]ederal law says some of his ... salary should have been withheld."

However, there are exceptions to this rule in the federal law.

A U.S. senator is permitted to be absent from his duties when there is a serious illness by the elected official or an immediate family member.

The law clearly states that if a senator fails to meet this requirement and is not present in the Senate chambers while it is in session, then a portion of his pay must be taken away from him.



Hope someone gets to the bottom of this. God knows any of us would lose our jobs or at LEAST have our pay docked if we pulled this! Interesting how the media totally ignores this about Kerry.

Jemison

One question, is a senetors job just to vote on issues? Do they do anything else?

It's pretty simple really.

You can't just "not" be President because its an election year. Business must be done in the name of the President.

Being a Senator when the opposition controls all branches is a pretty simple job, most bills will be voted in by Republicans so votes don't really matter. He's also the Junior Senator. Subordinates will do the day to day stuff for both men but each will have to sign papers.

Is this a double standard? No it's not. One man is the elected leader of a nation who should put country first and campaiging back and another is a Junior Senator. A junior senator wields relatively little power but dubya is responsible.

Bush has been slacking for 4 years. I mean, can you seriously vote for a man who schedules "nap time" in the afternoon?

Originally posted by Nerdling

Being a Senator when the opposition controls all branches is a pretty simple job, most bills will be voted in by Republicans so votes don't really matter. He's also the Junior Senator. Subordinates will do the day to day stuff for both men but each will have to sign papers.

So what you're saying is, if the Dem's controlled the senete, he would show up? As it is now the vote is already dictated so time can be spent better elsewhere?

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by Nerdling

Being a Senator when the opposition controls all branches is a pretty simple job, most bills will be voted in by Republicans so votes don't really matter. He's also the Junior Senator. Subordinates will do the day to day stuff for both men but each will have to sign papers.

So what you're saying is, if the Dem's controlled the senete, he would show up? As it is now the vote is already dictated so time can be spent better elsewhere?

Pretty much, yeah. I don't even think the Senate is in session right now.

Frankly if Kerry can't bother to show up to do HIS job I don't think he has any right to ask people to show up and vote for him on election day.

And I don't care how you rationalize it, a job is a job, and even before he started hard core campaigning he had a pretty bad attendance record for both votes and intelligence committe meetings. What kind of work ethics does he have? How can the guy talk about governmental waste with a straight face while he is collecting a pay check for not showing up to work?!

Jemison

As an example this bill was just passed in a rare weekend senate session while kerry was campaigning. Now whether you agree with ths bill or not did kerry not have an obligation to vote? Furthermore if, as you say nerdling, Kerry is too junior a senator for his vote to really matter why do we believe that he is qualified to be president?